Talk:Gas mask

This article is very bad

I looked at this one, then followed the link to HowStuffWorks.com, and a lot of this article is misleading, uninformative, and/or incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.168.58.97 (talk) 19:08, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

UK fetish?

"A small but significant number of people, particularly in the United Kingdom, have a sexual fetish about gas masks. It has been hypothesized that this may be because of childhood behavioral imprinting when these devices were issued in World War II".

Citation for the "particularly in the United Kingdom" bit? Who hypothesised this explanation? RayGirvan 19:09, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

Mickey Mouse gas mask

Oops! When I added the link, it was a factual article about U.S. Mickey Mouse gas masks for children, designed to counter their scary appearance. RayGirvan 11:53, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

respirator vs. gas mask

I am in the process of rewriting the Wikipedia entry for respirator, which is the correct name for what this entry calls a 'gas mask.' My reasoning is that 'gas mask' is incredibly incomplete as a description - for example, there are full face respirators, half face respirators, powered air-purifying respirators, different cartridges for different hazards, and more. In the United States, OSHA requires medical clearance to wear even a simple half face respirator during the course of employment, if the employer is covered under OSHA's Respiratory Protection standard; breathing through one of these respirators is not as easy as it seems on the surface.

If Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, it should at the very least discuss each type of respirator using the correct terminology, instead of 'filter mask' and 'gas mask.' Therefore, I am being bold and taking on the project. Help is appreciated and welcome; you can start by looking at the OSHA and NIOSH pages on respiratory protection, which can be found by doing a Google search for 'respirator' and either 'OSHA' or 'NIOSH.' Remember to come over to respirator - edits here will have to be moved over there anyway.

I would like to redirect this page to respirator once I'm finished, which won't be for several weeks. Please limit edits to this entry in the interim, because I don't want to put a 'major edit' hold on the page. Thanks. - ddlamb 22:45, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I support your approach, and agree with the respirator reasoning. Thank you for your efforts --Carboxen 23:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

There is yet another aspect to this. The US Military uses the term "Protective Mask" for what is improperly here being called a gas mask. (Note the caption on the picture on the right.) A true gas mask should protect the user from any gaseous or liquid environment. (ie: nothing of the gaseous or liquid environment makes its way into the closed system.) This requires that it have a self-contained environment ie: SCBA or for those divers SCUBA. The type of masks shown and described here, only filter out particulate or droplet material out of the gaseous environment. Most chemical agents are deployed as an aerosol. If it turns to a gas, which for something like sarin occurs at a fairly low temperature, these types of masks afford no protection to the wearer. (Most of this comes from US Army manuals and personal experience.) Anything you do to disabuse the public of the term "gas mask" is a public service. Regards -

Minor

Ben Egger is the best History teacher in the world as of this time.

I wonder how this sentence contributes to the article, and I don't see it as NPOV either, but I have never heard of the man so I might be mistaken. 62.204.152.170 09:53, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Picture

The picture of man with horse sucks, it is black & white, low quality.
I think we need a picture of the gasmask only, without it being weared by anyone, just a high-quality picture of the item.

Reference removed

Looking over the article and its history, while I pondered what part of it might be merged with respirator, I noticed the following reference was removed:

• HUMBOLDT, Alexander von. Ueber die unterirdischen Gasarten und die Mittel ihren Nachtheil zu vermindern. Ein Beytrag zur Physik der praktische Bergbaukunde. Braunschweig, Friedrich Vieweg, 1799. 8vo. With 3 engraved folded plates.

when the edit for "Revision as of 16:47, 18 January 2006" was made. The removal didn't look related to the content that was added that session and may possibly have been unintentional. If some content departs for respirator and this is a reference for it, maybe the reference should also travel over. Or maybe it should anyway. What was this a reference for and Mention of Humboldt is already made in the other article, but should it not be reinserted in this one? It was the only reference in the article. -thanks, Onceler 18:57, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Onceler, I haven't seen your post here until now but I think the reference should at least be in one of the two articles. The reference is for the Humboldt text entry, and the image of Humboldt's respirator alike.

I inserted it originally, with this image in the gas mask article

(text reference to Humboldt on 23:00, 31 October 2005 as 68.231.48.106; reference insertion 23:24, 31 October 2005 as 68.231.48.106; image insertion 23:24, 31 October 2005 as Carboxen).

I do think by the way that the articles should be merged, with gas mask being a referral/forward]]. --Carboxen 21:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Inventor

I've read another opinion that inventor of gas mask was Andrey Zelinsky in World War I (in 1915) against German gas attacks. May I add this to the article? --Vlad Jaroslavleff 17:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

   I've added this information.

Opinion Yes. Can we have a link other than a wiki one?

Yeah article please not www33.brinkster.com as it is not meet wiki guidelines.--BFritzen 15:48, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

The Imperial War Museum claim that the inventor was Edward Frank Harrison - this was covered in an article on the BBC's Today programme today Matt Beard (talk) 12:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Removal of "gas masks in popular culture"

Scoo has removed that section and I tend to agree with him on that move. I encourage the parties interested in that section to rather start a separate article about several such items, or include it in Fetish or other articles like that. The disputed content does not seem to add to general knowledge about gas masks as it describes an exotic niche use. I would welcome a one-sentence indication of that use in the main article, with a link to a more specific site. One of the reasons being that it really is less about facts about gas masks than about sexual orientation or habit, and should thus be included in such an article rather than in one about a PPE tool of trade. --Carboxen 20:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Please review the contribution of James Bert Garner as his invention of the gas mask is sourced and verifiable in numerous well known sources. I do not believe the credit given here to Zelinsky is credible but cannot confirm. --Richgus1972 (talk) 15:41, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

It looks wrong

The article reads:

_{Unlike other breathing devices, gas masks do not require the user to carry an air supply as in the use of scuba gear.}

In fact, a gas mask is a device protecting (this is the difference from a scuba gear) respiratory organs; also, there are gas masks that protect the eyes and the face. Protecting features are classified according to the type of protect:

• Filtrating gas masks, a gas mask of this type filtrates the surrounding air, usually the feature of replacing the filter is provived. Gas masks of this type are used against the definite types of toxic materials.

• Isolating gas masks. The respiratory organ breathes with the air generated by the cartridge. Gas masks of this type save lungs from radioactive materials.

• Hose gas masks. The air is carried from a certain distance, gas masks of this type are used for working in a vessel that contains toxic materials.

I suggest to add these data to the article and remove the quoted sentence. If nobody answers I will do it by myself. I also can provide pictures of non-filtrating gas masks.

A. Demidov (talk) 15:02, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Please either source or remove Zelinsky reference

I have found no evidence to back up the claim that Zelinsky invented the WWI gas mask but that rather it was James Bert Garner, a fact which is backed up in numerous sources. Please provide something other than an opinion for Zelinsky or in the interest of accuracy and quality I propose to remove the section. --Richgus1972 (talk) 04:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually there was only one, American, source claiming James Bert Garner invented with the Gas mask. Of which it doesn't make sense, as he only provided his research to Britian (long after Cluny MacPherson had already made the initial gas masks and Edward Harison had made the field servicable models) and was only involved in creating local American mining models later on. I've corrected James article on these facts and the creation of the modern Gas Mask is left to Cluny and Edward. TrackZero (talk) 20:04, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Have removed Zelinsky reference. --Richgus1972 (talk) 01:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, now English Wikipedia is free from Russian inventors! Wee! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Evlampya (talk • contribs) 14:50, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Here you can find Zelinsky gas mask as mass production item: http://gasmasklexikon.com/Page/Russia-Zielinski%20Kummant.htm also Instruction about using it(1916) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.206.175.238 (talk) 10:56, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Safety Hazard

Should someone write in that old gas masks contain a variety of very nasty shit in the cartridge and probably shouldn't be worn without removing the cartridge? Comradeash (talk) 15:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Only if you're a nanny state pussy.

Terribly written

Can't one of you English majors do something useful and clean this up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.145.193.107 (talk) 18:03, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

heavy metal

what? besides sid wilson and a RATM tshirt theyre not "an emblem of heavy metal"♠♦Д narchistPig♥♣ (talk) 03:39, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Plague

There should be a good reference to the masks doctors used during the black death. They were used because they beleived in the miasma theory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zadak (talk • contribs) 20:41, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Rename

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was do not move Anthony Appleyard (talk) 17:21, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

• Gas mask → Air supply mask — Can the article be moved to "air supply mask" or alternatively breathing mask? gas masks is a misleading term, it refers to the dispensing of any gas; which is inaccurate. only air is actually supplied (in diving, some mixtures with helium or high percentages of oxygen are used too but this still isn suffice to make the term gas mask a proper term. oxygen mask wasnt a good term as it supplies air (mixture with less than 1% oxygen). also, include jet aircraft masks, airline oxygen masks, second lungs/rebreathers and divers masks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.176.211.188 (talk) 17:12, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose. As the article lede says, this article is about the protective, air-purifying apparatus, generally used without an independent air supply. "Gas mask" is by far the most common term for that, so we should use it by WP:NAME. Hqb (talk) 18:19, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME 76.66.193.20 (talk) 07:34, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I see your point on the difference in the article; however, in this case I still propose a alternative name (gas mask doesnt' sounds like its a purifier). Perhaps something like Air purifier mask or Air filter mask, or portable air filter is more appropriate.

As for breathing mask/air supply mask proposition; perhaps a disambugation article can be made; stating that it may refer to air filter masks or "oxygen mask"s article (note that i would rename the oxygen mask article too to something like "Independant air supply mask"

• Oppose again per WP:COMMONNAME. Gas mask is used repeatedly throughout the article and most of the article seems to be about the sort of gas masks most commonly used in the military (and by civilian in WW2) to protect against poisionous gas and I've never heard them called anything other than gas amsk in common usage. Dpmuk (talk) 13:40, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose. What would you expect a reader who types "gas mask" in the search box to be looking for? Jafeluv (talk) 08:27, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Merge

Should this page not be merged with respirator?Jellyfish dave (talk) 13:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

As above see WP:COMMONNAME because the term 'gas mask' is the term for what the military use; the term 'respirator' is more for civilian non-chemical warfare use. Ginbot₈₆ 14:24, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Misuse of sources

This article has been edited by a user who is known to have misused sources to unduly promote certain views (see WP:Jagged 85 cleanup). Examination of the sources used by this editor often reveals that the sources have been selectively interpreted or blatantly misrepresented, going beyond any reasonable interpretation of the authors' intent.

I searched the page history, and found 1 major edit by Jagged 85 (see here). Please help by checking the edit to ensure that any claims are valid, and that any references do in fact verify what is claimed. Tobby72 (talk) 17:56, 19 January 2012 (UTC)